RE: Field Parsing Style

The problem I see with the Data Structure approach is that you have to be
able to guarantee that the data in the field will be consistently layoud out
in a rigid columnar style.  Most of the data that we deal with comes from
disparate systems and platforms, so using data structures can be a real
problem.  With in-line %subst, %scan, %check, %replace, etc., I can be
infinitely flexible by using conditional statements to parse the data
appropriately.

Just some thoughts,

Joel R. Cochran
Director of Internet Services
VamaNet.com
(800)480-8810
mailto:webmaster@vamanet.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Feador, Jerry [mailto:JFeador@Kiausa.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 11:37 AM
> To: 'rpg400-l@midrange.com'
> Subject: Field Parsing Style
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> Just a style question.
>
> The "standards" here say to always use a Data Structure to
> parse a field,
> yet I think it's more explanatory, at the line of code view,
> to %SubSt the
> information out.
>
> Are there any arguments one way or the other, besides
> readability? Speed?
> Data integrity?
>
> Thanks for your time,
> Capt.j
> _______________________________________________
> This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L)
> mailing list
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.
>